0
Skyrad

Building 7 WTC

Recommended Posts

Quote

I say we study some quantum physcics on viagra while taking a hit of blotter and suck Amazon into our vortex of lust while we simaltaneously astral project back to 1978...Imagine the possibilities.

Good bye Francis!;)



Amazon? '78? Dude you'll get arrested for child molestation!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

One person who is a conspiracy theorist says he gives an "accurate account of history." The problem is that in his paranoid imagination he believes he is right. Again, it does not matter if you show him to be totally wrong, because to him you then become part of the conspiracy. In short they have lost all touch with reality.

He and other conspiracy theorists change their so called evidence in response to each part of the conspiracy that is debunked. As soon as one delusion is unmasked, they simply invent another to replace it, and deny the first ever exsisted. Theorists aften argue that those who debunk such information are themselves involved in the conspiracy.

If some new information appears to undermine a conspiracy theory, either the plot is changed to make it consistent with the new information, or the theorist questions the legitimacy of the new information. This is something one can see over and over again in their comments.

They spend countless hours looking for things to support their theory. The sad thing is that when they find information that shows them wrong they simply bypass it and find people [and sources] to support their theory. They have the Idea that the greater the lie the more easily it is swallowed by the likeminded people.



Conspiracy Theorist: As a Mental Illness
Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

...the steel in the towers was rated to maintain sufficient strength to support the structure even considering the temperatures which could have possibly been generated by the fires of 9-11 .



No, it was not. Now you are making things up...again.
Also, the towers were designed to withstand the impact of an airliner. An airliner at approach speeds, not at 500-600 knots and fully fueled.
Water at high velocity can cut steel very quickly. It happens every second of every day.
Aluminum can punch through steel when pushed at high velocity by tons of jet fuel. No surprise there to anybody with knowledge.
Of course the towers fell pretty much straight down. that's the direction gravity pulls and it was the easiest path once the columns started to fail from too much heat and too much stress caused by supporting members being destroyed at impact. A tall narrow column can support incredible loads as long as it is supported from buckling. But once those supports are gone (they were contained in the outer walls of the towers) there is virtually nothing to prevent failure.
99.99% of engineers will agree that, considering the damage from the collisions with the airliners and the heat from the fires, it was only a matter of time before the building collapsed. No explosives needed, no thermite, no magic. Just simple physics.


I personally think Dan has his very own gravity anomaly


Oh, he has an anomaly alright. ;)
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

***Excellent videos. Also what people don't seem to notice is that during a controlled demolition you hear a series of explosions before the collapse. Listen to EVERY video of the towers collapsing and in none of them do you hear a series of explosions like you would in a controlled demolition.

Why is that? Does the government have some super secret silent explosives? Is everyone in new york deaf? Do video camera microphones not pick up explosions? Come on people. Take off your tin foil hats and step out of your fantasy world and step back into reality.



Like this?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y57qHmViTOg

Watch at about 2;20 into the video and see if that sounds about right.



Av fuel mixed with air in the lift shat being ignited could account for what the firefighters experienced. If it were demolition charges then how come the building remained standing for long enough for them to get out and then still apparently hadn't collapsed at the point that they're giving the interview? As for boom, boom, boom, boom, boom what else would you expect to hear as one floor falls on top of the next? You can hear those boom, boom, booms on some of the footage and they sound nothing like demolition charges.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Popular Science magazine did an article on this (they wondered if ther was anything to the "Alternative Theories" becasue they were so widespread and pervasive).

They couldn't find any validitiy to them.



Even Fox news reported on the "dancing Isreali Mossad agents".
Popular Science "couldn't find any validity" to any of the alternative theories?

Not one alternative theory holds any inkling of Truth and the Official , the Mainstream theory, is completely true and complete.

Is that what you believe?l



Are you saying that Mossad was behind the 9/11 attacks?
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

[Reply]As far as the aircraft (aluminum) impacting the structural steel columns.., have you ever played Rock , Paper ,Scissors?



Yes. Just like 2 pounds of styrofoam. No way it could penetrate the carbon carbon leading edge of the shuttle. It's too soft. Again, intuition says something that phsyics doesn't. But then, how come soft lead can punch a hole in steel? How can a bomb penetrate 10 feet of concrete? Because the energy is concentrated.

Those beams get sheared. Their connections get sheared. The beams move laterally - which is bad for a structural member. I recall the second tower to fall had the top leaning. Visibly tilted. And it got worse and worse. Not suddenly but gradually. Like the titanic didn't just sink. It took a couple of hours. And I know, the Titanic breaking in two also had to be a conspiracy. No iceberg could do that.



People are taking like the wings are empty Al tubes, forgetting whats inside them. Fuel tanks structural supports and not to mention miles of copper wiring.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

***Could you please reply to this question?

Quote

Well since you asked nice!

"Can you please explain to me why these same thousands of people, who pulled off the biggest conspiracy in the history of man, could not manage to plant a single WMD in Iraq? Or to a lesser degree, pull off the Valerie Plame outing?"



I don't know how familiar you are with the news but Valerie Plume was succesfully outed.
As far as Iraq and WMDs the US did place a large number of WMDs in Iraq. This is well documented
Where do you think Saddam got them?



Where did all the WMD's go once we got there? surlely a Government that is capable of pulling off 911 could plant a couple canisters of a nerve agent.

The Valerie plame point was to ask how the administration could pull off 911 without it being able to be traced back to the White House, Yet when they try and do something simple, like out plame on the down low, it is easily traced right back to the VP's, office.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

A structural engineer is what we need to help us sort all this out.



No...just a person with a video camera and an idiot with some common sense.



Common sense is far from common dear boy.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


I recognize that voice from years ago..,
Is that you Tokyo Rose?



It's been a long time baby...me so horney.

Let's make baby...we call Tokyo Johnson / Dan Rose....any ting you want.

LOL:D:D:D
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Hot steel is weaker than cold steel however the steel in the towers was rated to
>maintain sufficient strength to support the structure . . .

Yep. The only way it could have failed if some of the supports had been removed - say, by a fully fueled 767 flying at close to its top speed impacting the tower and destroying some supports completely and removing the insulation on others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's a plot of how the compressive yield strength of a steel alloy in general use is affected by temperature. I'm not sure what steel was used in the WTC, but this response is typical. The open air burning temperature of jet fuel is about 500F. At 500F, this steel only has 80% of its room temperature strength. As the temperature rises past 500F, you can see the strength drops off quickly. By the time you get to 800F, the strength is half of what it is at room temperature. Add this reduction in strength to the increase in load from damage to other columns, and failure is easy to explain.

- Dan G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Here's a plot of how the compressive yield strength of a steel alloy in general use is affected by temperature. I'm not sure what steel was used in the WTC, but this response is typical. The open air burning temperature of jet fuel is about 500F. At 500F, this steel only has 80% of its room temperature strength. As the temperature rises past 500F, you can see the strength drops off quickly. By the time you get to 800F, the strength is half of what it is at room temperature. Add this reduction in strength to the increase in load from damage to other columns, and failure is easy to explain.



Huh, you can prove anything with facts.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


People are taking like the wings are empty Al tubes, forgetting whats inside them. Fuel tanks structural supports and not to mention miles of copper wiring.



Not to mention that each wing has 9,000 pound GE CF6 turbofan attached. Not only is the exterior of the engine hardy, but the main shaft of the engine is remarkably similar in shape and construction (and significantly larger) than a sabot round. Or any penetrator.

The engines themselves due to their construction and mass, caused a world of hurt.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The Valerie plame point was to ask how the administration could pull off 911 without it being able to be traced back to the White House, Yet when they try and do something simple, like out plame on the down low, it is easily traced right back to the VP's, office.



No, it was Richard Armitage that told Novak, but actually her husband had been blabbing it to many reporters. That story was such a great example of intentional misreporting.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's an interesting PBS interview with Larry Silverstein about (lessee of WTC towers) WTC 7. He talks about making the call to "pull it" which in demolition terms means implode it, on Sept. 11th 2001 because it was damaged (slightly) when the other buildings fell. From all the evidence i've seen WTC 7 was imploded and it's crazy to think they somehow set this up by the afternoon of Sept. 11 2001. He later backed off this comment and said he meant "pull them out" as in the firemen in WTC 7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

There's an interesting PBS interview with Larry Silverstein about (lessee of WTC towers) WTC 7. He talks about making the call to "pull it" which in demolition terms means implode it, on Sept. 11th 2001 because it was damaged (slightly) when the other buildings fell. From all the evidence i've seen WTC 7 was imploded and it's crazy to think they somehow set this up by the afternoon of Sept. 11 2001. He later backed off this comment and said he meant "pull them out" as in the firemen in WTC 7.



Can't you morons give it a break at least for today? Huh?? Is it too much to ask you FUCKING MORONS to show a little RESPECT???
Fucking morons. FUCKING STUPID GODDAMN MORONS.
HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0